Community

Hi all,
so I have started to look at D and dug through the documentation, but
could not get a good answer on the following:
How can I have a (temporary) dynamic array on stack and make references
to it (no copying)? I successively put integers in an array (but don't
know how much there will be in advance) with an appender!(int[]) and get
the date out with appender.data(). Later on I pass the result to a
method as an "in int[]" parameter. Is that already a reference or will
it be copied? Are there better methods to accomplish this? The method
receiving such an array will not modifiy contents of the array, but only
read from it.
Thanks in advance,
Tom
--
P.s. To put a bit of context around that, here some notes on what I am
working (some questions here as well, but above is the primary one):
My first try-out project in D is an Object file reader (often used in
computer graphics). Part of that is a parsing method which parses a
single line that contains a definition of a face (a polygon). It could
for instance look like this:
f 1//10 2//10 3//10
That means it is a triangle face of points 1, 2 and 3 (three groups,
first number is point index). Furthermore no texture coordinate index
(no number between two slashes) and each with normal vector index 10.
But I don't want to go into detail of that. Say I want to parse that
line with D and in the end call a method to process that face with
references to lists of the different point indices:
void process_face(int index, int vcount, in int[] vertices,
in int[] texcoords = null, in int[] normals = null)
{
...
}
(I guess "in" means sth. like const reference)
The arrays should not be copied, but be references. The line parsing
method now has the following lines (line is a char[]):
//search face
int index = indexOf(line, "f ");
if(index != -1)
{
line = line[index+2 .. $]; // slice away the "f " part
fc++; // increment face count
int slash;
while(true)
{
slash = indexOf(line, " /"); // leading spaces + slashes?
if(slash != -1)
// remove space
line = line[0 .. slash] ~ line[slash+1 .. $];
else
break;
}
while(true)
{
slash = indexOf(line, "/ "); // trailing spaces + slashes?
if(slash != -1)
// remove space
line = line[0 .. slash+1] ~ line[slash+2 .. $];
else
break;
}
// dynamic vertex, texture and normal arrays
auto vIndices = appender!(int[])();
auto tIndices = appender!(int[])();
auto nIndices = appender!(int[])();
// some indices
int vi,ti,ni;
// split line on white spaces
char[][] vertexCoords = split( line );
// go through each part - are those splittings ok?
foreach(char[] coord; vertexCoords) {
vi = parse!(int)(coord); //get int from string
vIndices.put( vi ); // save it in vertex array
if (coord[0] == '/') { // follows a slash?
coord = coord[1 ..$]; // get rid of it
if (coord[0] == '/') { // follows another slash?
coord = coord[1 ..$]; // get rid of it
ni = parse!(int)( coord ); // git following int
nIndices.put( ni ); // save it in normal array
} else {
ti = parse!(int)( coord );
tIndices.put( ti );
if (coord[0] == '/') {
coord = coord[1 ..$];
int ni = parse!(int)( coord );
nIndices.put( ni );
}
}
}
}
// array references for passing to processing method
int[] varray = null, tarray = null, narray = null;
// if we have data, save it to appropriate varible
if( !(vIndices.data().empty()) )
varray = vIndices.data();
if( !(tIndices.data().empty()) )
tarray = tIndices.data();
if( !(nIndices.data().empty()) )
narray = nIndices.data();
// process it
process_face(fc, vIndices.data().length, varray, tarray, narray);
return;
}
I hope this rather lengthy explanation is no problem here (if looked on
it at all, since it was not my primary question :-) ). If you are in the
mood, please comment on how make parts on it better. It is pretty much
my first D code. Well, thanks.
Cheers
Tom

Tom Kazimiers:
> How can I have a (temporary) dynamic array on stack and make references
> to it (no copying)? I successively put integers in an array (but don't
> know how much there will be in advance) with an appender!(int[]) and get
> the date out with appender.data(). Later on I pass the result to a
> method as an "in int[]" parameter. Is that already a reference or will
> it be copied? Are there better methods to accomplish this? The method
> receiving such an array will not modifiy contents of the array, but only
> read from it.
The appender.data() doesn't currently copy data.
There is no standard way to put a growable array on the stack. Maybe you can hack it with several successive calls to alloca(), but I have never tried it.
There many other solutions, like:
- Using a fixed-sized array on the stack, you keep its true length in a variable
- The same, with static array
- The same with a static gshared array
- pre-allocating a "large enough" dynamic array before all the calls to the function that uses them
- using a single alloca() when you know how many items you have to append
- use a deque data structure that uses a manually-managed pool of blocks of items, that you can concatenate in a linked list or index through a dynamic array of pointers
The cuter solution is to simulate a realloc on the stack (to keep a single growable array) with a series of calls to alloca. But I don't know if it works :-) I will try it.
Bye,
bearophile

My first test shows that it may work. But I have to grow the array backwards, and push back the array start, because that's how my stack grows (using alloca to allocate geometrically bigger chunks). So unless you want to reverse the items once the array is built, you have to change the algorithm that uses the array a little.
Bye,
bearophile

On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 22:41:50 -0400, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com>
wrote:
> Tom Kazimiers:
>> How can I have a (temporary) dynamic array on stack and make references
>> to it (no copying)? I successively put integers in an array (but don't
>> know how much there will be in advance) with an appender!(int[]) and get
>> the date out with appender.data(). Later on I pass the result to a
>> method as an "in int[]" parameter. Is that already a reference or will
>> it be copied? Are there better methods to accomplish this? The method
>> receiving such an array will not modifiy contents of the array, but only
>> read from it.
>
> The appender.data() doesn't currently copy data.
>
> There is no standard way to put a growable array on the stack. Maybe you
> can hack it with several successive calls to alloca(), but I have never
> tried it.
Hm... you can do something like this (after upcoming release, appender has
changed):
void foo()
{
int[1024] buf;
auto app = appender(buf[]);
app.clear();
...
}
After app.clear, appender will fill up the static buffer until full, and
then reallocate on the heap.
Note that the new appender uses heap data to store its implementation, so
it's not as quick as it could be. This is per Andrei's requirement that
it be a reference type.
-Steve

Hi,
On 09/06/2010 04:55 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Static arrays are value types, but dynamic arrays are reference types.
>
> [...]
>
> No array copying takes place anywhere in that program. If you want to
> copy an array, you'd do one of the following
>
> [...]
>
> Passing dynamic arrays to functions passes the reference.
Thanks for your clarification and examples, that made the whole array
handling clearer to me.
On 09/07/2010 02:56 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Sep 2010 22:41:50 -0400, bearophile wrote:
>> Tom Kazimiers:
>>> How can I have a (temporary) dynamic array on stack and make
>>> references to it (no copying)? I successively put integers in an
>>> array (but don't know how much there will be in advance) with an
>>> appender!(int[]) and get the date out with appender.data(). Later
>>> on I pass the result to a method as an "in int[]" parameter. Is
>>> that already a reference or will it be copied? Are there better
>>> methods to accomplish this? The method receiving such an array will
>>> not modifiy contents of the array, but only read from it.
>>
>> The appender.data() doesn't currently copy data.
>>
>> There is no standard way to put a growable array on the stack. Maybe
>> you can hack it with several successive calls to alloca(), but I have
>> never tried it.
Ok, good to know. But for now I will stay away from optimizations with
alloca, etc. - its's harder to read the code then - premature
optimization is evil :-)
> Hm... you can do something like this (after upcoming release, appender
> has changed):
>
> void foo()
> {
> int[1024] buf;
> auto app = appender(buf[]);
> app.clear();
> ...
> }
>
> After app.clear, appender will fill up the static buffer until full,
> and then reallocate on the heap.
>
> Note that the new appender uses heap data to store its implementation,
> so it's not as quick as it could be. This is per Andrei's requirement
> that it be a reference type.
That sound good - when will this upcoming release be?
Cheers,
Tom

Hi,
thanks for your tests.
On 09/06/2010 04:59 AM, bearophile wrote:
> My first test shows that it may work. But I have to grow the array
> backwards, and push back the array start, because that's how my stack
> grows (using alloca to allocate geometrically bigger chunks). So
> unless you want to reverse the items once the array is built, you
> have to change the algorithm that uses the array a little.
Unfortunately I need the elements to stay in the order I have added
them. But good to know that it would work with backward growing of the
array - do have you an example of that?
Cheers,
Tom

Steven Schveighoffer:
> Note that the new appender uses heap data to store its implementation, so
> it's not as quick as it could be. This is per Andrei's requirement that
> it be a reference type.
Thank you for your answers. But I don't fully understand your answer. Do you mean it uses the Pimpl idiom, and allocates the struct on the heap?
I use appender only when performance is important. The appender is a hack useful because array appending in D is very slow (and even appender is quite slow), so it must be first of all fast, otherwise it's not useful.
I generally use appender inside the scope of a single function.
So unless I am missing something I think Andrei requirement is/was wrong.
Bye,
bearophile

On Tue, 07 Sep 2010 12:54:52 -0400, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com>
wrote:
> Steven Schveighoffer:
>> Note that the new appender uses heap data to store its implementation,
>> so
>> it's not as quick as it could be. This is per Andrei's requirement that
>> it be a reference type.
>
> Thank you for your answers. But I don't fully understand your answer. Do
> you mean it uses the Pimpl idiom, and allocates the struct on the heap?
Yes.
> I use appender only when performance is important. The appender is a
> hack useful because array appending in D is very slow (and even appender
> is quite slow), so it must be first of all fast, otherwise it's not
> useful.
Appending is as fast as possible, at the cost of an initial allocation.
Without this, the capacity would have to be stored inside the array, or be
aliased, which wouldn't work all that well.
> I generally use appender inside the scope of a single function.
>
> So unless I am missing something I think Andrei requirement is/was wrong.
An appender is an ouput range, so passing it into a function so the
function can output to it is a requirement.
-Steve

Steven Schveighoffer:
> An appender is an ouput range, so passing it into a function so the
> function can output to it is a requirement.
I see, that's useful. I will write a Pimp-less version of it, then (when I don't need a range, but just a local accumulator).
Thank you for your always gentle answers,
hugs,
bearophile